First They Came for the Bump Fire Stocks. Then They Came for “Military-Grade Night Vision Gear.” Then . . .

When a reporter asked California Congresswoman (and former concealed carry licensee) Nancy Pelosi if her bump fire stock ban bill was a slippery slope to great gun control, she replied “I certainly hope so.” As the feds continue to wrangle over bump fire stocks, the Huffington Post is eagerly waiting for some new gun control slope sliding. Like this . . .

While the Las Vegas massacre rekindled the debate over the millions of assault-style rifles owned by American civilians, there’s been much less public scrutiny of all the gear designed for military operations that is now marketed directly to civilians . . .

The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives does not regulate the sale or use of night vision equipment, a spokesperson said, and the legality of using night vision devices for hunting varies by state.

Ladd Everitt, the director of One Pulse for America, a gun violence prevention group, says that should change. Military-style gear like night vision equipment could be used in mass shootings like the one in Las Vegas, he said. (The Vegas shooter himself did not use night vision gear.)

Night vision equipment is “not the tool of sportsmen,” Everitt said. “It’s the tool of people who are seeking to kill as many people as possible in as short amount of time as possible.”

Like . . . a pressure cooker bomb? Speaking of which, lots of stuff could be used to kill as many people as possible: Home Depot trucks, fertilizer, gasoline, dump trucks. etc. Should they all be banned?

The HuffPost’s assault on the sale of U.S.-legal night vision equipment focuses on the possibility that bad actors acting badly (on behalf of ISIS and other U.S. enemies) can buy the stuff and ship it abroad. But the quote from Mr Everitt highlights the antis’ real goal: civilian disarmament.

The problem here: bump fire stocks and “military grade night vision gear” aren’t firearms per se. So it’s easy to claim they’re not covered by the Second Amendment’s protection against government infringement. Just as it’s easiest to degrade and destroy the right to keep and bear arms by chipping away than a full frontal assault. In case you hadn’t already figured that out.

[Note: another appearance of “gun violence prevention.” And this is the first we’ve heard of the George Takei-founded One Pulse for America. Its Director is gun control extremist Ladd Everitt of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence.]

Notice how these milquetoast commie gun grabbers, who never leave the “safe” confines of the upper west side and have never even touched a firearm; love to declare themselves experts on what does and doesn’t have sporting purposes, infantry tactics, and just about everything firearms related?

And anyone else getting annoyed of hearing the tired old shpeal: “It’s the tool of people who are seeking to kill as many people as possible in as short amount of time as possible.”

With as much as they talk about carnage and death, I think it’s some sort of psychological projection and fantasy that these leftists have.

I honestly think that these leftists want to go on some mass shooting against a bunch of disarmed Americans. The mainstream media love it when regular Americans are killed by bad guys.

They’ve shown time and time again that they have sympathy to cop killers, Islamic terrorists, illegal aliens, and communist dictators; while at the same time they gleefully report, almost to the point of celebration, dead American soldiers, dead police officers, and so forth…

DiFi, Ladd Everitt, and arianna huffington ought to be the ones being looked at by the government not us gun owners.

– When a BG is about to harm you, more lethal is better. Unless you want more peaceful citizens helplessly abused by BGs, you want the most capable, lethal possible arms in the hands of good people.

We on people’s responsibility, good sense in decency. If you believe most people are other than that, most of the time, of course you don’t want them armed (while of course you must always have armed protection. You want the people who suck disarmed; the righteous not. That congress-critter Pelosi constantly wants us disarmed, while she has guards show’s exactly who she thinks is who.

– Bad guys are really quite creative. Guns can stay if a safe if the BGs will only attack you by your safe; stay at the range if that’s the only place the BGs will work, not see in the dark if the BGs will only do their thing in the light.

No Marquise of Queensbury rules — they’ll come at you in the dark if they can. Or any other way that stacks the odds. I’ll consider limiting citizens’ arms to whatever the overlords define, when they’ll guarantee the bad guys will do the same.

Carried arms are because we don’t know where or when BGs will try to do something stupid & harmful, by force.

– The “slow the government down” argument depends on parity.

If they have it, the citizens have it. Philosophy aside: how “for the people” is a government the people are revolting against. (“The people are revolting.” Yes we get it. Also bitter, deplorable, and irredeemable.) With hat tip to Kathy Shaidle, it doesn’t say “AR-pattern” right next to where it doesn’t say “musket.”

– Criminals don’t use the expensive stuff; they depend on creating a mismatch situation. A mismatch in capability sometimes levels the contest a bit.

Criminals don’t use even the now very affordable AR-pattern rifles. They don’t use longer-range target or hunting guns. They don’t use well-maintained reliable pistols. Let’s recall that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Stings, Gun-Running and Really Big Fires had to *give away* “high power” arms to get enough of them in the hands of the cartels to make their “ban all the things” case.

It’s her world, we’re all just living in it.

Pelosi’s real concern is that citizens who oppose her notions might have parity when she sends her enforcers. Sadly, she burned “We have to pass the bill for you to see what’s in it.” already. In the end, Pelosi isn’t about responsible citizens governing ourselves. She’s gonna decide for us, and impose it by force if she has to. She’s just that right.

I, too can imagine worlds more pleasant to my preferences. No thugs, predators, crazies or terrorists. No entertainment producers leveraging their position throttling the money flow to extract their rent in trade. No Olby on my TV. I was briefly hopeful that he and “Musket”, bereft of their larger platforms, might fade into the obscurity they so richly deserve. Sadly, various forums still trot them out for their unique bleating.

Different from Madam Forgets-Shes-Not-Speaker, and indeed HerSelf as well, I don’t think the world of my imagining must be. I will do what I can to make it so, but what happens, happens. For whatever reason, I don’t feel myself empowered to force other people to behave as I’d like, or as if the world is as I imaging.

There’s an assault underway in the media and the leftist progressives who want to turn the US into a Stalinist Russia or a Mao China. If there is any tool that can be used to fight or evade/escape from their KGB or Gestapo thugs, they want them banned. Guns are number one because they actually can be used against them and their agents, night vision goggles can help in low light evasion. Soon they’ll be asking why anyone should be able to buy and own a gas mask without a background check and 6 month waiting period.

After that it would be solar generators, water filters, people who plant gardens… make no mistake the fascist Marxist progressive left wants to control the American people like the Soviets did their own people.

The first thing the salesman told me when I asked about night vision at my local sport box store was ” don’t try to take this out of the country, they confiscate them all the time at the airport”! More lies from the media!

Y’all know how it is, get a gun and instantly turn into a murderous maniac. Get a silencer and you’ll become a night stalker. Get night-vision gear and you’ll be that Bill guy from “Silence of the Lambs” by Thanksgiving…

Someone could argue that night blindness is a disability and that people that suffer from it it need easy access to these night vision gogles to function at night in much the same way as a crippled person needs easy access to a wheelchair to function.